BBOers Festival Winners - September 2024
September's Festival news round-up The September Festival has come to an end, an...
The Summer 2024 NABC Robot Individual has concluded, and it's time to honor our champions! After three grueling days of bridge in a formidable field of more than 2000 participants, here are the final results:
🥇 First Place: Grant Peacock (GrantP) from Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Congratulations to Grant Peacock (
GrantP) for claiming 1st place and the NABC Title, with an outstanding overall score of 72.37%. Grant's journey to victory began with a strong start, achieving 69.34% on Day 1, followed by an impressive 76.09% on Day 2. Maintaining his momentum, he secured his first-place finish with 71.68% on Day 3. Well done, Grant!
🥈 Second Place: Phil Clayton (phil) from Bella Vista, Arkansas, USA
In second place, we have Phil Clayton (
phil) with an overall score of 70.63%. His performance included a great start with 72.36% on Day 1, followed by 66.40% on Day 2, and another strong showing with 73.13% on Day 3. Congratulations, Phil!
🥉 Third Place: Robert Brady (bradybot) from McLean, Virginia, USA
Robert Brady (
bradybot) rounded out the top three with an overall score of 68.88%. His scores included 69.64% on Day 1, 66.42% on Day 2, and a solid finish with 70.58% on Day 3. Fantastic job, Robert!
Congratulations to all 2118 players who took part in the tournament and made it a success. Check the complete rankings here to see where you placed!
Please share your thoughts, interesting hands or anecdotes from the tournament in the comments below.
Day one results
| Rank | Score | Name | Username | Masterpoints |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st | 72.48% | Rafal Gardzielewski |  every | 18.00 |
| 2nd | 72.36% | Phil Clayton |  phil | 13.50 |
| 3rd | 71.55% | Krzysztof Pikus |  sukip | 10.13 |
Day two results
| Rank | Score | Name | Username | Masterpoints |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st | 77.12% | Alberto Gerli |  elbec_2 | 18.00 |
| 2nd | 76.09% | Grant Peacock | GrantP | 13.50 |
| 3rd | 73.73% | Robert Lao |  lxxr | 10.13 |
Day three results
| Rank | Score | Name | Username | Masterpoints |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st | 76.89% | David Chechelashvili |  dato | 18.00 |
| 2nd | 73.22% | Zachary Madden |  gartinmale | 13.50 |
| 3rd | 73.16% | Leo Lasota | Leo LaSota | 10.13 |
Overall results
| Rank | Score | Name | Username | Masterpoints |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st | 72.37% | Grant Peacock | GrantP | 48.00 |
| 2nd | 70.63% | Phil Clayton | phil | 36.00 |
| 3rd | 68.88% | Robert Brady | bradybot | 27.00 |
| 4th | 68.45% | Ronald Vickery | rvickery | 21.33 |
| 5th | 68.24% | Alberto Gerli | elbec_2 | 20.41 |
Find your own result quickly by using Command+F or Control+F to search for your BBO username.
Pretty funny comment from Anonymous. First, thanks John. Second, I challenge anyone to look at my 72 boards and find a single one where I manipulated a hand. Yes, there are many players that open all hands either 1N, 2N or a short suit. Yes, they randomize their own result and give themselves unnecessary zeroes and while they might occasionally post 78% its normal for them to post 53% the next day.
I do well in these because I take the event seriously and grind every hand. I work hard to get to the best contract in a normal fashion to avoid variance. Then I try to take more tricks than the field, which is what pairs is all about.
Frankly, I love it when there are other good players that do unusual stuff. It only makes my job easier.
Here's a middle ground game theory comment Phil--
I am not half as good as you or Alex or Grant or the best players in this event.
So I have to create variances that I couldn't normally create. The robots give me an opportunity to do that. I try to be judicious about it, but it's my only chance to compete.
Anyway, I am always amazed by the winners, congrats Grant!
All fair points and no problem with that approach. I will do the same thing in a high level pair event although I will not step out to the degree people do with GIB.
What rankles me is the advice handed out by some YouTube bridge celebrities that are peddling the idea of making random opening bids and claiming it's EV+ and trying to completely game the robots.
This is bad for the game.
I'd rather people work harder on their card play and bidding judgement instead of looking for easy answers with the robots as if it were a weight loss pill.
Day 2 results show the overall ranking after two days, not the actual day 2 result.
Thanks for pointing out, it's corrected now! And congratulations for your good performance 🙂
He or she who manipulates the bots best wins. Go look at the results and you'll have a good laugh. This kind of stuff undermines the game of bridge.
I couldn't seem to post a comment alone, so I'm following this.
Outstanding performance by our winner! I see a lot of familiar names in the top tier; Grant's a great player (having made the best call I have ever seen at the table) and his victory is well-earned.
(As to the post I'm replying to, I quote Josh Donn: "It's not possible to be good at robot bridge and not good at bridge." Further, second place Phil Clayton plays a pretty straightforward game against the bots, or at least did when he won.)
Congrats, Grant!